| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
tb_a
Joined: 26 Jan 2010
Posts: 3678
Location: Austria
Expire: 2019-08-28
|
 Posted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 7:53 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
tb_a wrote:
| Nordentro wrote: |
well enough heard about this Zenitar lens, I just bought one  |
Wise decision. I don't think that you'll regret it.
_________________
Thomas Bernardy
Manual focus lenses mainly from Minolta, Pentax, Voigtlaender, Leitz, Topcon and from Russia (too many to be listed here). |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
newst
Joined: 21 Oct 2014
Posts: 617
Location: Troy, MI USA
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 9:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
newst wrote:
I bought a Zenitar M and Helios 44M-7 about the same time. I have read those line/mm numbers from different sources but, based on my experience, they don't make sense. The Zenitar (and my copy is multi-coated) is insanely sharp with great color and buttery bokeh. The Helios wasn't bad but no where near the Zenitar in performance. I sold the Helios, kept the Zenitar.
_________________
Steve
Just an armadillo on the shoulder of the information superhighway. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nordentro
Joined: 24 Jun 2010
Posts: 4713
Location: Lillehammer, Norway
Expire: 2015-01-29
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 04, 2015 11:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nordentro wrote:
I am expecting a super lens in my mailbox after all this positive comments!
_________________
Lars | Manuellfokus.no |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Humulus
Joined: 23 Sep 2014
Posts: 130
Location: Poland
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 05, 2015 6:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
Humulus wrote:
I'm sure you won't be disappointed  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tb_a
Joined: 26 Jan 2010
Posts: 3678
Location: Austria
Expire: 2019-08-28
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 05, 2015 12:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tb_a wrote:
I've done a quick and dirty comparison between the Ultron 50/1.8, the Zenitar 50/1.7 and the Minolta AF 50/1.4 on my 24MP/FF camera Sony A850 at the very critical infinity landscape subject. From my experience those pictures clearly make the differences. Better than any other motive.
To make a long story short: The center of the pictures are as already stated nearly indistinguishable at same apertures where wide open I had to compare Ultron at 1.8 with Zenitar at 1.7 and Minolta at 1.7.
The extreme corners make the difference: Minolta is by far the best especially when stopped down. Ultron second and Zenitar worst (up to F5.6). At F11 I would rate Zenitar second and Ultron worst as the Ultron still shows some minor traces of CA in the corners. CA's are no issues at all with the Minolta or the Zenitar.
The Minolta is like the Ultron a 7/6 lens (but different formula) and the Zenitar only 6/5. That may be the reason why the Zenitar cannot reach better edge performance wide open.
However, what I found rather astonishing was that the Minolta is that good and beating the Ultron in every aspect. I am really glad to have this lens.
If I have some time and motivation I will present the sample images in a separate thread.
BTW, I know it would have been more appropriate to take the Minolta MD 50/1.7 instead but unfortunately I cannot use it on my FF camera.
Finally it should be mentioned that if those lenses are used either on APS-C or even MFT the differences will be minor or will disappear at all. That should also be clear.
_________________
Thomas Bernardy
Manual focus lenses mainly from Minolta, Pentax, Voigtlaender, Leitz, Topcon and from Russia (too many to be listed here). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
memetph
Joined: 01 Dec 2013
Posts: 942
Location: Poland
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 05, 2015 3:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
memetph wrote:
Hallo,
The MD 50mm 1.7 is a 7/6 formula ? I think only the Ultron has 7 elements. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
simbon4o
Joined: 19 Dec 2011
Posts: 390
Location: Bulgaria
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 05, 2015 5:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
simbon4o wrote:
Zenitar 50 1.7 is all about the current copy  . My current copy is the sharpest I have tried till now. Pretty close to Canon FDn 50 1.4 which is a sharp 50mm. Even in corners.
_________________
10-300мм 4.0 - 1.2 - 4.5  NIKON&Sony bodies / Sony 10-18, Pentax 28 2.8 II, CZJ 35 2.4, Nikkor DX 35 1.8, Samyang 35 1.4, KMZ 50 1.7, FDn 50 1.2 L, Nikkor 55 2.8, Rokkor 58 1.2, Soligor 85 1.8 Preset, Samyang 85 1.4, Canon FDn 85 1.2 L, Tokina AT-X 90 2.5, Canon FDn 135mm 2.0, Nikkor 180 2.8 ED, Tair 300 4.5
________
snimo.net |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tb_a
Joined: 26 Jan 2010
Posts: 3678
Location: Austria
Expire: 2019-08-28
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 05, 2015 6:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tb_a wrote:
| memetph wrote: |
Hallo,
The MD 50mm 1.7 is a 7/6 formula ? I think only the Ultron has 7 elements. |
Who said that?
The MD 50/1.7 is like the Zenitar a 6/5 lens, BUT the tested Minolta AF 50/1.4 and the Ultron have both 7 elements in 6 groups.
The reason for my comparison was to find out how the Zenitar compares to other excellent lenses and the Ultron was tested to be the best MF lens of the 50mm primes below F2 and above F1.5 (Colorfoto 1981). That was a good opportunity to test the "reference lens" against my Zenitar (my copy is from 1983) AND the Minolta AF 50/1.4 (built slightly later). FYI, I have no other Minolta lens in 50mm that would fit on my Sony A850. Minolta SR (MC/MD) lenses are not usable on that camera. I didn't see any reason to take any of the Helios 44 variants I have as it was already clear for me that they would be worse compared to the Zenitar. To include the Minolta AF lens was just for my personal interest as I have never tested it against any other lens directly before.
I hope everything is clear now.
_________________
Thomas Bernardy
Manual focus lenses mainly from Minolta, Pentax, Voigtlaender, Leitz, Topcon and from Russia (too many to be listed here). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tb_a
Joined: 26 Jan 2010
Posts: 3678
Location: Austria
Expire: 2019-08-28
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 05, 2015 6:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tb_a wrote:
| simbon4o wrote: |
| Zenitar 50 1.7 is all about the current copy . My current copy is the sharpest I have tried till now. Pretty close to Canon FDn 50 1.4 which is a sharp 50mm. Even in corners. |
Stopped down my Zenitar comes pretty close to my Minolta AF 50/1.4 as well, even in the corners. However, wide open on FF the Zenitar sharpness suffers clearly visible in the extreme corners and fails to deliver usable landscape pictures at infinity. I don't know anything about the optical quality of the Canon lens as I don't have one.
For practical use this is not so important as nobody would do landscapes at F1.7 anyway.
_________________
Thomas Bernardy
Manual focus lenses mainly from Minolta, Pentax, Voigtlaender, Leitz, Topcon and from Russia (too many to be listed here). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kamerer
Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Posts: 389
Location: Russia Moscow
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 06, 2015 5:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
Kamerer wrote:
and Volna 50\1.8....
_________________
Sony NEX-3 + NEX C3
MC Helios-44M-4
VMC Vivitar 28-90/2.8-3.5 Ser1
Pentakta 2/30
My texts are translated by the electronic translator. Best regards, Sergey.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nmarsollier
Joined: 05 Apr 2024
Posts: 1
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 05, 2024 5:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
nmarsollier wrote:
Zenitar-M 1.7/50
#1
#2
It performs much better than my 2 Helios. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blotafton
Joined: 08 Aug 2013
Posts: 1554
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 05, 2024 6:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
blotafton wrote:
Welcome!
| nmarsollier wrote: |
Zenitar-M 1.7/50
#1
#2
It performs much better than my 2 Helios. |
(First post spam filter) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 10543
Location: California
Expire: 2025-04-11
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2024 12:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
Welcome nmarsollier! Bravo heart-shaped highlight & beautiful rose,
_________________
☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony ILCE-7RM2, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
Lenses:
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200, Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300, Macro-Takumar 1:4/50, Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm, Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element), Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17, Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500, Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100, Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100, SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
M42 Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
Contax Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 28-70mm F3.5-4.5
Pentax K-mount SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51BB), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto (Kiron)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
